Well, it was predictable, at least. Don't you love government management of the economy?

Quote:Some Valley employers, especially those in the food industry, say payroll budgets have risen so much that they're cutting hours, instituting hiring freezes and laying off employees.

And teens are among the first workers to go.

Companies maintain the new wage was raised to $6.75 per hour from $5.15 per hour to help the breadwinners in working-poor families. Teens typically have other means of support.

Mark Messner, owner of Pepi's Pizza in south Phoenix, estimates he has employed more than 2,000 high school students since 1990. But he plans to lay off three teenage workers and decrease hours worked by others. Of his 25-person workforce, roughly 75 percent are in high school.

"I've had to go to some of my kids and say, 'Look, my payroll just increased 13 percent,' " he said. " 'Sorry, I don't have any hours for you.' "

Perhaps a better example than a pizza parlor could be used. A friend used to manage a non-chain neighborhood pizza parlor in L.A. that did at least half of its business with deliveries. He claimed that their cost of a $15 pizza was around $3 depending upon toppings. The owner took 5 figures out of the place each week. A 13% increase in the payroll, when the bulk of the employment is centered mainly around the dinner hour, isn't in dollar terms all that much of a hit to the bottom line.

Minimum wage in the Yukon was raised from $7.20/hour to $8.25/hour not that long ago, and theres talk of raising it again. It is currently the second highest in Canada (Nunavut I believe has $8.50). In winter you have to do some looking to find a job, but in summer here you can take a walk through town and see a help wanted sign in pretty much every second window. All depends where you live I guess...

Quoting D L X (Reply 3):I like government management of the economy a LOT more than I like corporate management of the economy.

For every little pizza shop that now can't find a way to pay a teenager, there are 50 corporations that would send that job overseas if they can find a way.

Really nice rhetoric, but how is it going to help the people who lose their jobs because an employer can't raise his prices fast enough to cover the labor costs that have risen not because the market pushes them there, but because the government wants them to?

Better than a man with a family. Teens should be in school learning so that they don't have to make minimum wage some day. So if some teens don't have jobs so a that a person with a couple kids can work and make a little bit more, then so be it.

Either way it affects the economy bad and good.

Bad: Yes some companies cannot afford to pay workers the higher amount and therefore have to lay off.

Good: The companies that can afford to pay more, which means that the worker takes home more money and can afford to spend it therefore giving the economy a boost.

My first job paid $2.80 per hour when the minimum wage was $2.30 per hour back in 1976. Everyone was happy to get that extra 50¢ per hour, and those who weren't up to snuff got the boot rather quickly. But there are a lot of jobs where they merely need a body, the state-mandated gas jockeys in Oregon come to mind, and there needs to be some sort of minimum. Oregon has its own minimum wage law, that was at least a couple of bux higher than the former federal rate.

The annual inflation rate is approximately 3%. $5.15/hr is 1997 dollars, NOT 2007 dollars. After 10 years at $5.15/hour, the wage should be 30% higher to compensate for this. Therefore, .30 x $5.15 = $1.55; $5.15 + $1.55 = $6.70. Minimum wage should be $6.70/hour.

I do agree though that the raise should be gradually enacted, to prevent "shock," but I am not against the raise itself.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 6):Really nice rhetoric, but how is it going to help the people who lose their jobs because an employer can't raise his prices fast enough to cover the labor costs that have risen not because the market pushes them there, but because the government wants them to?

Well, that's a run-on if ever there was... I think you're saying we should be upset that some kids lost their jobs because of the hike, and we should be upset that it was because of government action as opposed to market action. As a Republican, why do you make this distinction? Would you be upset if the kid lost his job because a big corporation (that didn't hire the kid) knocked off the little shop?

Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL

The minimum wage, unlike many other wages, HAS NOT increased at all to keep up with inflation. The minimum wage was $5.15 10 years ago, and should be raised on par with inflation. We are seeing a problem of neglect now: the wage has to now step up less gradually, causing a more painful transition. Were the wage indexed yearly with inflation, this would not be a problem.

Blame the lawmakers who refused to raise it for 10 years (even though they raise their own salaries yearly).

Quoting D L X (Reply 7):Quoting Halls120 (Reply 5):I am for letting the market decide what labor is worth. Not the government by edict
This is *very* shortsighted. Child labor, 75 hour work weeks (for non-lawyers), 10 days vacation (the federal holidays)...

Remember, there was once a time in American history where the market *did* decide. It wasn't good. That's why we have controls now.

I'm not suggesting that all controls be cast aside. But when the minimum wage is arbitrarily raised in one step by 31%, that is a rise that most small businesses can't absorb, and as a result, people lose their jobs.

Gee, I didn't realize that we're being judged on our grammar. Didn't realize you were so tight assed about such trivialities. After all, it's just the internet.

Quoting D L X (Reply 11): I think you're saying we should be upset that some kids lost their jobs because of the hike, and we should be upset that it was because of government action as opposed to market action.

The age of the people who have lost their jobs is not my concern. But you are right - I am concerned that the government has improperly meddled in something best left to the market.

Quoting D L X (Reply 11):As a Republican, why do you make this distinction? Would you be upset if the kid lost his job because a big corporation (that didn't hire the kid) knocked off the little shop?

Since I'm not a republican, I'm not sure I know how to answer this question. What's interesting is why so many people here like to label others instead of staying on point.

As an independent, here's my answer. If the small pizza joint closes because Pizza Hut moved in and forced him out of business, I'd say too bad, but that's life. But I'll bet that the kid who worked for the Mom and Pop store can get a job at Pizza Hut.

Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 12):Quoting Halls120 (Reply 5):I am for letting the market decide what labor is worth.
So you'll have the super-rich and ultra-poor. How's that good for the country?

ÊÊ You really believe raising the minimum wage is going to address the problem of income disparity?

Quoting Halls120 (Thread starter):Well, it was predictable, at least. Don't you love government management of the economy?

Well, an estimated 1.6 percent of the people in the nationwide workforce earned wages at or below $5.15 per hour before it was increased. I doubt that the negative effects of this increase will hurt the economy at all.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 20):I'm not suggesting that all controls be cast aside. But when the minimum wage is arbitrarily raised in one step by 31%, that is a rise that most small businesses can't absorb, and as a result, people lose their jobs.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 20):If the small pizza joint closes because Pizza Hut moved in and forced him out of business, I'd say too bad, but that's life.

So, you're not actually concerned with the kid. OK. But why base your argument on it then? Why don't you simply say "I don't like raising the minimum wage because I like letting the market control" and leaving it at that?

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 20):You really believe raising the minimum wage is going to address the problem of income disparity?

That's not what he said. He's opposed to letting the market decide, as you suggested. And, I agree - letting the market decide will slowly erode the middle class and take us back towards the fiefdom era.

Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL

25 PPVRA
: Raises costs, which is the reason for outsourcing. If there are direct incentives is another matter. Those would likely be damaging, and at the very

26 Doug_Or
: I support the increase, but common man. Of course an increase in the minimum wage will increase the incentive to outsource. Increasing the minimum wa

27 Falcon84
: We already have that. The rich are getting huge tax breaks-during a war, no less-while the rest of us are given tougher regulations to pay off debt,

28 NASCARAirforce
: Most minimum wage jobs are in the service sector. You can't outsource a McDonalds job to India. I don't think anyone would work a manufacturing job f

29 D L X
: No no no! You've got it backwards. This isn't a chicken and egg situation: outsourcing happened long before the minimum wage increase. LONG before. I

30 Doug_Or
: Well you actauly can outsource drive through ordering overseas (can't find a link, but it has been done). The fact that most minimum wage jobs can't

31 Halls120
: You may be correct. But if so few people earn the minimum wage, why does the government feel the need to raise it by 31%? My guess is that they are d

32 NASCARAirforce
: I believe it, but it would go over about as well as a fart in church. It is hard enough to understand the drive thru speakers as it is let alone some

33 AndesSMF
: Just to check, does ANYONE here know someone who works for minimum wage only? After all, there are plenty of jobs (restaurants, casinos, etc.) where y

34 Falcon84
: If you made just over 6 figures, you are definitely not in the category of "rich", nor are you getting the windfall of the breaks those who really ar

35 Halls120
: Ah yes, the evil rich are sucking the poor and middle class dry. Good tale, but it isn't true. You can find the table at http://www.taxfoundation.org

36 Falcon84
: Actually, it is the truth. Since this president took office, the gap between rich and poor is just skyrocketing. It's absolutely the truth. Try two s